to think that this 'transsexual' Jesus play should not get public funding?

[whatwilltheythinkofnext]

I would say 'no words' but how about "disgusting, insulting, disrespectful, immoral..." need I go on? How does this awful thing get 'public funding' - I'd be demanding a refund of my council tax. Enough already!

I wonder if the OP would get the same reaction if the play was about playing Mohammed as a transsexual

Well, from me she would. Ditto if the play were about Guru Nanak, or Buddha etc etc.

Sometimes I think artists are simply being controversial for the sake of it. While I still think we should be free to do that I don't tend to have a lot of sympathy with the artist in question once the backlash starts.

In this case, there seems to be some thought behind it, and since the playwright is Christian it is unlikely the motive is to damage or mock Christianity.

I think if anyone - Muslim or not - tried to do something as blasphemous to Islam as this is to Christianity there would be death threats and outrage and people saying 'oh free speech...but...'. I personally don't think any religion should have protection from free speech but the double standard is glaring and a bit revolting.

catfordbetty It wasn't really a question was it? Unless you think asking for conjecture as to the possible behaviour of someone else following an event that isn't happening counts as a sensible question.

As I said above, Jesus is already a religious figure in Islam there's no need to "wonder" about how people any possible reaction to a Muslim religious figure as the play is already about a Muslim religious figure. So why drag Mohammed into it?

As it happens, for myself, I believe that free speech includes art that encourages us to see things in different ways or portrays in people in different ways, including people like Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha and everyone else. I also believe a narrow-minded bigot is a narrow-minded bigot. It doesn't matter what your creed is.

So, I repeat again: why do those of you who think a religious figure of any kind or religion is 'disgusting' and 'immoral' think this play is. I genuinely can't see it; so instead of just slinging insults at us, why don't you just tell us?

I don't think it's Peter wigglesrock , it's far more likely to be the ever charming TUV, or that fabulous church on the Shore Road who keep funding legal activity to highlight their righteous indignation, or even Wee Willie Wingnut and his rent a protest cronies (both of them) who have recently picketed the airport and a city hall demonstration by the Belfast anti fascist league (leading many to conclude that they must in fact be pro fascist, despite covering themselves in poppies and waving Israeli flags).

There is regrettably no shortage of mouth breathers, halfwits and reactionary illiterates on the NI political spectrum.

From the link Mrs Pratchett posted:

"As a practising Christian myself, I have no interest in attacking the church or mocking the church or make fun of the church or in anyway being blasphemous or offensive ... I simply want to assert very strongly, as strongly as I can that Jesus of the gospels would not in anyway wish to attack or denigrate people like myself.”

Sounds reasonable to me.

littlegreyauditor TUV was my second bet - but I don't think old Jim could frequent MN - too many women and brain cells in close proximity would cause him to implode.

An advert for the play popped up on my FB feed last night - I was wondering when I would hear the first complaints about it - MN it is then - funny old world!

Woah. "...why do those of you who think a religious figure of any kind or religion is 'disgusting' and 'immoral' think this play is."???

I meant, "why do those of you who think portrayal of a religious figure of any kind or religion as a transexual is 'disgusting' and 'immoral' think this play is."

If you just mean you think transexuals are disgusting and immoral then for god's sake just come out and say so. And as for calling a transexual 'blasphemous'.... to coin a phrase, holy shit!

And me ravioli!

I don't think this is a challenging play at all. It is an old trope to take a classic story and make the main character a different sex, sexuality, ethnicity, and so on. So it sounds fairly boring and hackneyed to me. But of course there is nothing wrong with this being part of a local festival. I think there should be more mocking of religion.

Anything that pisses off Colin Hart and his bloody Christian Institute can't be all bad. This sounds like first-class entertainment.

I suspect the OP is the playwright, director or venue organiser, drumming up a bit of advance publicity.

I think Christianity is robust enough to take a bit of ribbing. And the Jesus in an adult nappy in Jerry Springer: the Opera was kinda heart-warming, though admittedly a lot less cool than Satan...

I think there should be more mocking of religion.
Does that mean all religions, or just Christianity. Not the ones who might give death threats out though, because if Mohammed was getting mocked even in a far less way than this you can bet your bottom dollar there would be serious consequences. Not got the bottle for that obviously.

Religion is just a social construct. Comparing them is stupid as they have different doctrines.

What is important though, is that most reasonable people do not give a shite what ONE drama company in the whole world is doing with a transsexual jesus.

It doesn't matter. Jesus would probably have loved it and thought it was novel.

But this guy isn't mocking religion?

"I think there should be more mocking of religion.
Does that mean all religions, or just Christianity. Not the ones who might give death threats out though, because if Mohammed was getting mocked even in a far less way than this you can bet your bottom dollar there would be serious consequences. Not got the bottle for that obviously."

Oh, I'm happy to mock any religion going!

But I don't think this play is mocking any religion, is it?

asking for conjecture as to the possible behaviour of someone else following an event that isn't happening counts as a sensible question

This is called a hypothetical question. You may feel entitled to ignore it on those grounds. That's fair enough but questions like these often provoke searching discussion.

Religion is just a social construct. Comparing them is stupid as they have different doctrines

How convenient!

Okay all you little UKIPpers and folk who are saying 'oh the muslims wouldn't allow it'. Do bear in mind you are talking about something being put on in Northern Ireland, or does your history fail you when it's not convenient?

Oh, I'm happy to mock any religion going! Somehow I don't believe that.

Yes, some hypothetical questions do. But as we are already talking about the portrayal of a Muslim religious figure as a transexual in the first place, bringing another one into the mix is in order to conjecture "but what about the Muslims" is extraneous. Some might say it was disingenuous.

This is called logic, by the way. You may feel entitled to ignore it on those grounds.

Brilliant. Top idea. If only they'd made Jesus dusky hued and disabled too.

Hullygully Or Jewish!

"Oh, I'm happy to mock any religion going! Somehow I don't believe that"

Try me! But the problem is that Muslims in this country very rarely do anything mock-worthy. And they do not expect special privileges, or impose their beliefs on me. Unlike Christians. And I am much more knowledgable about Christianity than I am about Islam. So I am less inclined to criticise or mock their faith.